Author
Topic: The West and Russia (Read 1510 times)

It is important to recognize that the West and Russia are two different realities.

In Russia however what to Americans looks brutal and paranoid is really a result of a different vision - of the need for example of an immediacy in going from point a to b. Of a singleness of vision in regards to what is detrimental. (I have spoken with many people about this difference between the two cultures - what to Americans seems a high value of tolerance to Russians seems hypocritical in reality and self-deluded in result; i.e. if a culture believes in something shouldn't it be an inherent cultural imperative to defend these beliefs? or similarly: how can you say you believe in something if you are not willing to act against whatever threatens this?)

Half a century ago England was a Christian country (albeit of the Anglican variety, mostly). It was at one time taken for granted that people were Christians there. Not only that, but it was understood - because it did not have to be stated - that this was a country whose culture, morals and outlook had been formed by the Christian faith. This country bent over backwards to be welcoming and tolerant towards those who came here from the 1960s onwards who were not Christian, and, indeed, for the most part, Moslem. At the same time, we saw a growth in secularism, materialism, modernism, and the dilution of the Christian foundations of the British society. Only recently has it become apparent that the Christian faith here needs defending, but such has been the progress of those elements in society which oppose it that views which were the norm only thirty or forty years ago are now condemned as rabidly reactionary.

In Russia, however, Orthodoxy always was an integral part of the very fabric of life in Russia in a way which defined what Russia was and what it meant to be Russian in a much deeper way than could be said of the Church in England, for instance. This was so to such an extent that the catastrophe of the Revolution and the 70 years 'Babylonian captivity' could not erase that reality. Russians feel that Orthodoxy defines who they are as a people and defines Russia as a country. Protestant evangelists who seek to turn people in Russia from Orthodoxy to heresy, are accordingly viewed as threats not only to the Orthodox Church but to Russians as they understand themselves to be and Russia as they know it. Russians I know see them as aliens peddling an alien thought.

Perhaps you could say then that these are two different visions of reality: the 'tolerant' western one and the 'actively protective' Russian one. Pastorally this needs to be taken into account according to who or what reality you deal with. But most importantly, it should be born in mind that these two visions do not enjoy one-to-one relationship (since they are not of the same value). Instead, it was Russia but not the West which gave the Orthodox Church more martyrs than in the whole of Christian history put together.

It is important to recognize that the West and Russia are two different realities.

In Russia however what to Americans looks brutal and paranoid is really a result of a different vision - of the need for example of an immediacy in going from point a to b. Of a singleness of vision in regards to what is detrimental. (I have spoken with many people about this difference between the two cultures - what to Americans seems a high value of tolerance to Russians seems hypocritical in reality and self-deluded in result; i.e. if a culture believes in something shouldn't it be an inherent cultural imperative to defend these beliefs? or similarly: how can you say you believe in something if you are not willing to act against whatever threatens this?)

Half a century ago England was a Christian country (albeit of the Anglican variety, mostly). It was at one time taken for granted that people were Christians there. Not only that, but it was understood - because it did not have to be stated - that this was a country whose culture, morals and outlook had been formed by the Christian faith. This country bent over backwards to be welcoming and tolerant towards those who came here from the 1960s onwards who were not Christian, and, indeed, for the most part, Moslem. At the same time, we saw a growth in secularism, materialism, modernism, and the dilution of the Christian foundations of the British society. Only recently has it become apparent that the Christian faith here needs defending, but such has been the progress of those elements in society which oppose it that views which were the norm only thirty or forty years ago are now condemned as rabidly reactionary.

In Russia, however, Orthodoxy always was an integral part of the very fabric of life in Russia in a way which defined what Russia was and what it meant to be Russian in a much deeper way than could be said of the Church in England, for instance. This was so to such an extent that the catastrophe of the Revolution and the 70 years 'Babylonian captivity' could not erase that reality. Russians feel that Orthodoxy defines who they are as a people and defines Russia as a country. Protestant evangelists who seek to turn people in Russia from Orthodoxy to heresy, are accordingly viewed as threats not only to the Orthodox Church but to Russians as they understand themselves to be and Russia as they know it. Russians I know see them as aliens peddling an alien thought.

Perhaps you could say then that these are two different visions of reality: the 'tolerant' western one and the 'actively protective' Russian one. Pastorally this needs to be taken into account according to who or what reality you deal with. But most importantly, it should be born in mind that these two visions do not enjoy one-to-one relationship (since they are not of the same value). Instead, it was Russia but not the West which gave the Orthodox Church more martyrs than in the whole of Christian history put together.

In Christ,

Oleg Aney

Thanks for the insightful post,I had always seen this from the outside looking in,it's nice to have a perspective from someone on the inside,my wife and I hosted a foreign exchange student from Russia years ago. So I understand a little of your concerns. One thing I also understand is Russia's animosity toward American Democracy,don't get me wrong I love my country,but I don't like the direction it's headed in and much of it is because of the policies of the Evangelical Right,and the Progressives, both sides really work together to achieve the same goal. I really think that once Orthodoxy continues to stand for the authentic Gospel in this country things will begin to change,instead of the radical individualism and the break down of families,which has taken hold here,we will have stronger families,and stronger communities.

... One thing I also understand is Russia's animosity toward American Democracy,don't get me wrong I love my country,but I don't like the direction it's headed in and much of it is because of the policies of the Evangelical Right,and the Progressives, both sides really work together to achieve the same goal. I really think that once Orthodoxy continues to stand for the authentic Gospel in this country things will begin to change ...,[/unquote]

Thank you for your comment, Denny.

Very true. This is exactly what we are seeing in the USA. Both parties have liberals who have made careers in politics, and not because of their profound altruism and humanity, but for self-advancement, power and money (this is also true for politicians in the Kremlin, btw). The politicians have little faith. But in God you trust, America!

Obama (or I should say: Barack Hussein Obama) said publicly "It is important to note that if you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we’d be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world". I don't know whether it's his wishful thinking... The USA is still 70% Christian!

No doubt in my mind what is going on in the world. Liberals are trying to disarm Christians (in the USA, England, Russia, etceteras...) and I believe the ideas (and laws) they passed is the cause of actually raising of non-Orthodox 'spirituality'.

I am not sure why one would find it necessary to emphasis President Obama's full name. A name does not necessarily tell much about what a person believes or does. He was named after his father who from what I have read was not a believing or practicing Muslim.

The President himself is Christian.

With respect

Ebor

Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

A debate between the Brazilian philosopher Olavo de Carvalho and Russian neo-fascism militant Alexandr Dugin. It also dealt with the differences between Russia and the West and other geopolitical issues:

"What are the historical, political, ideological and economic factors and actors that now define the dynamics and configuration of power in the world and what is the U.S. position in what is known as New World Order?”

In Russia, however, Orthodoxy always was an integral part of the very fabric of life in Russia in a way which defined what Russia was and what it meant to be Russian in a much deeper way than could be said of the Church in England, for instance. This was so to such an extent that the catastrophe of the Revolution and the 70 years 'Babylonian captivity' could not erase that reality. Russians feel that Orthodoxy defines who they are as a people and defines Russia as a country. Protestant evangelists who seek to turn people in Russia from Orthodoxy to heresy, are accordingly viewed as threats not only to the Orthodox Church but to Russians as they understand themselves to be and Russia as they know it. Russians I know see them as aliens peddling an alien thought.

Dear Oleg, but is it really so? Isn't it a sweet myth created by sentimental Manilovs from the Russian intelligentsia? When one reads short stories by Bunin ("Village") or Kuprin ("Horse Thieves" and other), the impression is quite different. Real Russians from real Russian villages have been completely pagan. They spent their entire lives laboring very hard in order merely to survive, - and they stole, cheated, lied, killed, slept with their neighbors' wives, drank tons of moonshine, etc. etc. etc. In many cases they hated their priests, because the latter were as greedy and cruel as their landlords were. Christian self-denial, temperance, prudence, charity, mercy were simply unknown. When they caught a horse thief, the whole village would beat and kick him to death, for hours and hours. This, and Christianity, are, as far as I can see, completely incompatible, something from different planets, different galaxies.

Perhaps you could say then that these are two different visions of reality: the 'tolerant' western one and the 'actively protective' Russian one. Pastorally this needs to be taken into account according to who or what reality you deal with. But most importantly, it should be born in mind that these two visions do not enjoy one-to-one relationship (since they are not of the same value). Instead, it was Russia but not the West which gave the Orthodox Church more martyrs than in the whole of Christian history put together.

But it was Russia and not the West who produced the monstrous Bolshevik "revolution," the Moloch who chewed up all these "hostile classes."

I am a Ukrainian, but to me, there is no alternative to freedom, free will, free choice, free elections, transparency in the operation of the state, human rights, etc. Either these "Western" values reign, or, alternatively, everything becomes one big bloody Chechnya or Kongo or the like. Without the so-called "Western" values, people will forever live in darkness, blood, corruption and hopelessness.

Dear Oleg, but is it really so? Isn't it a sweet myth created by sentimental Manilovs from the Russian intelligentsia? When one reads short stories by Bunin ("Village") or Kuprin ("Horse Thieves" and other), the impression is quite different. Real Russians from real Russian villages have been completely pagan. They spent their entire lives laboring very hard in order merely to survive, - and they stole, cheated, lied, killed, slept with their neighbors' wives, drank tons of moonshine, etc. etc. etc. In many cases they hated their priests, because the latter were as greedy and cruel as their landlords were. Christian self-denial, temperance, prudence, charity, mercy were simply unknown. When they caught a horse thief, the whole village would beat and kick him to death, for hours and hours. This, and Christianity, are, as far as I can see, completely incompatible, something from different planets, different galaxies.

I think you have explained why there was a Russian Revolution and also the 1905 protests. Unfortunately, the Orthodox nobility did nothing for the poor in Russia.

A debate between the Brazilian philosopher Olavo de Carvalho and Russian neo-fascism militant Alexandr Dugin. It also dealt with the differences between Russia and the West and other geopolitical issues:

"What are the historical, political, ideological and economic factors and actors that now define the dynamics and configuration of power in the world and what is the U.S. position in what is known as New World Order?”

Dear Fabio, out of my respect for you I read this entire debate. In my opinion both Olavo and Alesndr are nut jobs. This is despite the fact that Olavo is a good debater and relevant regardless of his opinions. He was brilliant in this particular debate but reading the posts on his web site, http://www.olavodecarvalho.org/english/, shows him to be irrational as the rest of us. Although nausea was my general physiological response (I have the same affliction as Biro in this regard), I did appreciate Olavo's sense of humor in his remarks. I, in particular, agreed with his remarks in Reply Two section 28 "Stage Play" with the progression of thought from Kant to Jacques Derrida. (unless I misunderstood him, philosophers are always tricky in this regard, language must always be opaque in order to provide a line of defense for idiocy).

It is important to recognize that the West and Russia are two different realities.

In Russia however what to Americans looks brutal and paranoid is really a result of a different vision - of the need for example of an immediacy in going from point a to b. Of a singleness of vision in regards to what is detrimental. (I have spoken with many people about this difference between the two cultures - what to Americans seems a high value of tolerance to Russians seems hypocritical in reality and self-deluded in result; i.e. if a culture believes in something shouldn't it be an inherent cultural imperative to defend these beliefs? or similarly: how can you say you believe in something if you are not willing to act against whatever threatens this?)

Half a century ago England was a Christian country (albeit of the Anglican variety, mostly). It was at one time taken for granted that people were Christians there. Not only that, but it was understood - because it did not have to be stated - that this was a country whose culture, morals and outlook had been formed by the Christian faith. This country bent over backwards to be welcoming and tolerant towards those who came here from the 1960s onwards who were not Christian, and, indeed, for the most part, Moslem. At the same time, we saw a growth in secularism, materialism, modernism, and the dilution of the Christian foundations of the British society. Only recently has it become apparent that the Christian faith here needs defending, but such has been the progress of those elements in society which oppose it that views which were the norm only thirty or forty years ago are now condemned as rabidly reactionary.

In Russia, however, Orthodoxy always was an integral part of the very fabric of life in Russia in a way which defined what Russia was and what it meant to be Russian in a much deeper way than could be said of the Church in England, for instance. This was so to such an extent that the catastrophe of the Revolution and the 70 years 'Babylonian captivity' could not erase that reality. Russians feel that Orthodoxy defines who they are as a people and defines Russia as a country. Protestant evangelists who seek to turn people in Russia from Orthodoxy to heresy, are accordingly viewed as threats not only to the Orthodox Church but to Russians as they understand themselves to be and Russia as they know it. Russians I know see them as aliens peddling an alien thought.

Perhaps you could say then that these are two different visions of reality: the 'tolerant' western one and the 'actively protective' Russian one. Pastorally this needs to be taken into account according to who or what reality you deal with. But most importantly, it should be born in mind that these two visions do not enjoy one-to-one relationship (since they are not of the same value). Instead, it was Russia but not the West which gave the Orthodox Church more martyrs than in the whole of Christian history put together.

In Christ,

Oleg Aney

What an excellent post!

I share almost the same beliefs as you, and had to comment. Unfortunately what happened in Britain is a tragedy. The fault lays squarely with evil, trojan horse, long term strategies to destroy Anglo-Christian culture, such as allowing mass immigration, multiculturalism, introducing neo-revisionist history claiming that colonial policies were at fault for everything etc and an infiltration of politically correct, anti-discrimination laws to gag the majority from speaking out or taking action against what is happening.

All these changes have resulted in British citizens being unable to publicly say what they really think and feel about what is happening to their country for fear of the consequences. Even worse, third worldlers rapidly multiply and spread their false religions everywhere, demand Sharia law, bomb buses/trains etc.

* Gratuitous political commentary removed from post - PtA *

Russia on the other hand has the advantage of limited legal immigration and a strong government at least commited to defending the makeup and religious identity of the country.

A debate between the Brazilian philosopher Olavo de Carvalho and Russian neo-fascism militant Alexandr Dugin. It also dealt with the differences between Russia and the West and other geopolitical issues:

"What are the historical, political, ideological and economic factors and actors that now define the dynamics and configuration of power in the world and what is the U.S. position in what is known as New World Order?”

Dear Fabio, out of my respect for you I read this entire debate. In my opinion both Olavo and Alesndr are nut jobs. This is despite the fact that Olavo is a good debater and relevant regardless of his opinions. He was brilliant in this particular debate but reading the posts on his web site, http://www.olavodecarvalho.org/english/, shows him to be irrational as the rest of us. Although nausea was my general physiological response (I have the same affliction as Biro in this regard), I did appreciate Olavo's sense of humor in his remarks. I, in particular, agreed with his remarks in Reply Two section 28 "Stage Play" with the progression of thought from Kant to Jacques Derrida. (unless I misunderstood him, philosophers are always tricky in this regard, language must always be opaque in order to provide a line of defense for idiocy).

Opus, Olavo does cause that first impression. In time, I have noticed that it is part of his personal approach to life: despise what is despiscable. He *really* feels it is a moral duty to disrespect what is not respectful. He thinks that one of the worst intellectual sins of our times is that we lend respect to far too many disrespectful people and ideas. He thinks that debating abortionists, gayzists, leftists, liberals as *equals* is the first and greates mistake we commit, because, not being equals, but holding inferior ideas, the sheer fact that we lend them a strength that is ours is what gives them advantage. He does not condescend in treating anyone he thinks is mallicious or a prideful ignorant with the same respect he gives to people who actually have good intentions and/or have studied what they are talking about. As he himself said once, presumptious ignorance, the pretense of political correctness are some of the worst enemies of clear and honest thinking, and he chose to make these his personal enemies. Dugin, though as a nutjob as he may be, does have the ears of Putin and some others in the Russian elite, a kind of modern Rasputin. So, for Olavo, treating him as an equal would be to give him a legitimacy that he does not deserve and cannot have. Dugin, for Olavo, has to be unmasked as the ideologue of authoritarian slavic-fascism he is and provider of a new façade to the old Russian authoritarian leaders and robber barons. Hence, the abundant sarcasm. Olavo's tone in his philosophical work (in the right column of his site) has a very different note.

I just saw the note on political posts. Can it be moved to the political forum?

If you wish to start a spinoff thread that expounds further on the political aspects of anything posted to this thread, feel free to go ahead and do so. I really don't see, though, how your recent posts discussed politics enough to warrant them being moved to Politics.

All these changes have resulted in British citizens being unable to publicly say what they really think and feel about what is happening to their country for fear of the consequences. Even worse, third worldlers rapidly multiply

Many Orthodox Christians are "third worlders". You share a cup with them. Deal with it.

« Last Edit: August 26, 2011, 09:46:46 AM by Iconodule »

Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cryIs to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

All these changes have resulted in British citizens being unable to publicly say what they really think and feel about what is happening to their country for fear of the consequences. Even worse, third worldlers rapidly multiply

Many Orthodox Christians are "third worlders". You share a cup with them. Deal with it.

When you say that most Orthodox are "third world" do you mean because of poverty?Russia may be poor economically but is rich in erms of a highly educated populace. Also very rich in terms of cultural activity. It is cheaper to go to the opera in Russia for the average person than in Canada where I live. Same with live theatre. In terms of education & access to health care and cultural activity you cannot say Russia is third world.If i have misunderstood you, I am sorry.

All these changes have resulted in British citizens being unable to publicly say what they really think and feel about what is happening to their country for fear of the consequences. Even worse, third worldlers rapidly multiply

Many Orthodox Christians are "third worlders". You share a cup with them. Deal with it.

When you say that most Orthodox are "third world" do you mean because of poverty?Russia may be poor economically but is rich in erms of a highly educated populace. Also very rich in terms of cultural activity. It is cheaper to go to the opera in Russia for the average person than in Canada where I live. Same with live theatre. In terms of education & access to health care and cultural activity you cannot say Russia is third world.If i have misunderstood you, I am sorry.

I said "many" not "most." I am thinking of the Orthodox in Africa and Asia who live in countries that are considered "third world." But I think quibbling over my use of the word really misses the larger issue here...

Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cryIs to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

In Russia, however, Orthodoxy always was an integral part of the very fabric of life in Russia in a way which defined what Russia was and what it meant to be Russian in a much deeper way than could be said of the Church in England, for instance. This was so to such an extent that the catastrophe of the Revolution and the 70 years 'Babylonian captivity' could not erase that reality. Russians feel that Orthodoxy defines who they are as a people and defines Russia as a country. Protestant evangelists who seek to turn people in Russia from Orthodoxy to heresy, are accordingly viewed as threats not only to the Orthodox Church but to Russians as they understand themselves to be and Russia as they know it. Russians I know see them as aliens peddling an alien thought.

Dear Oleg, but is it really so? Isn't it a sweet myth created by sentimental Manilovs from the Russian intelligentsia? When one reads short stories by Bunin ("Village") or Kuprin ("Horse Thieves" and other), the impression is quite different. Real Russians from real Russian villages have been completely pagan. They spent their entire lives laboring very hard in order merely to survive, - and they stole, cheated, lied, killed, slept with their neighbors' wives, drank tons of moonshine, etc. etc. etc. In many cases they hated their priests, because the latter were as greedy and cruel as their landlords were. Christian self-denial, temperance, prudence, charity, mercy were simply unknown. When they caught a horse thief, the whole village would beat and kick him to death, for hours and hours. This, and Christianity, are, as far as I can see, completely incompatible, something from different planets, different galaxies.

Perhaps you could say then that these are two different visions of reality: the 'tolerant' western one and the 'actively protective' Russian one. Pastorally this needs to be taken into account according to who or what reality you deal with. But most importantly, it should be born in mind that these two visions do not enjoy one-to-one relationship (since they are not of the same value). Instead, it was Russia but not the West which gave the Orthodox Church more martyrs than in the whole of Christian history put together.

But it was Russia and not the West who produced the monstrous Bolshevik "revolution," the Moloch who chewed up all these "hostile classes."

I am a Ukrainian, but to me, there is no alternative to freedom, free will, free choice, free elections, transparency in the operation of the state, human rights, etc. Either these "Western" values reign, or, alternatively, everything becomes one big bloody Chechnya or Kongo or the like. Without the so-called "Western" values, people will forever live in darkness, blood, corruption and hopelessness.

The whole idea of Marxism originated from the West. Changes in Western Europe,since the French Revolution, were taking hold. To state that "it was Russia and not the West who produced the monstrous Bolshevik revolution", is misleading. There existed many factors why the Bolsheviks took control, such as, a weak leadership, World War I, working conditions amongst the workers, primarily in the cities, and Trotsky's financial connections in New York City. Lenin was ruthless in his goals and was determined to be the head of this movement.

Basic Western values are a positive objective, as long as the leadership does not corrupt these values with politics and self interests.

In Russia, however, Orthodoxy always was an integral part of the very fabric of life in Russia in a way which defined what Russia was and what it meant to be Russian in a much deeper way than could be said of the Church in England, for instance. This was so to such an extent that the catastrophe of the Revolution and the 70 years 'Babylonian captivity' could not erase that reality. Russians feel that Orthodoxy defines who they are as a people and defines Russia as a country. Protestant evangelists who seek to turn people in Russia from Orthodoxy to heresy, are accordingly viewed as threats not only to the Orthodox Church but to Russians as they understand themselves to be and Russia as they know it. Russians I know see them as aliens peddling an alien thought.

Dear Oleg, but is it really so? Isn't it a sweet myth created by sentimental Manilovs from the Russian intelligentsia? When one reads short stories by Bunin ("Village") or Kuprin ("Horse Thieves" and other), the impression is quite different. Real Russians from real Russian villages have been completely pagan. They spent their entire lives laboring very hard in order merely to survive, - and they stole, cheated, lied, killed, slept with their neighbors' wives, drank tons of moonshine, etc. etc. etc. In many cases they hated their priests, because the latter were as greedy and cruel as their landlords were. Christian self-denial, temperance, prudence, charity, mercy were simply unknown. When they caught a horse thief, the whole village would beat and kick him to death, for hours and hours. This, and Christianity, are, as far as I can see, completely incompatible, something from different planets, different galaxies.

Perhaps you could say then that these are two different visions of reality: the 'tolerant' western one and the 'actively protective' Russian one. Pastorally this needs to be taken into account according to who or what reality you deal with. But most importantly, it should be born in mind that these two visions do not enjoy one-to-one relationship (since they are not of the same value). Instead, it was Russia but not the West which gave the Orthodox Church more martyrs than in the whole of Christian history put together.

But it was Russia and not the West who produced the monstrous Bolshevik "revolution," the Moloch who chewed up all these "hostile classes."

I am a Ukrainian, but to me, there is no alternative to freedom, free will, free choice, free elections, transparency in the operation of the state, human rights, etc. Either these "Western" values reign, or, alternatively, everything becomes one big bloody Chechnya or Kongo or the like. Without the so-called "Western" values, people will forever live in darkness, blood, corruption and hopelessness.

The Weimar Republic was full of Western values. How did that work out?

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

Is not the situation in Russia just a culture that exists within Orthodoxy? It does not define Orthodoxy & some concept of a "Third Rome" may be sufficient for those within its boundaries but Orthodoxy is not defined by this concept. Orthodoxy is supposed to be bigger than the decaying west & the burden is on the church to evangelize there & elsewhere. I am not sure if any of the existing canonical groupings adequately address the needs of the west.

Is not the situation in Russia just a culture that exists within Orthodoxy? It does not define Orthodoxy & some concept of a "Third Rome" may be sufficient for those within its boundaries but Orthodoxy is not defined by this concept. Orthodoxy is supposed to be bigger than the decaying west & the burden is on the church to evangelize there & elsewhere. I am not sure if any of the existing canonical groupings adequately address the needs of the west.

Very wise words. I am uncomfortable with the alliance of politics and orthodoxy such as the revivial of "Moscow the Third Rome" ideology again and the messianic aspirations of Russia. You are right orthodoxy has to be "above" current politics and ideologies that go in and out of fashion.